RE: [bc-gnso] BC statement on IRT

[Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

>From Marilyn Cade, ICT Strategies, mCADE llc
I support Ayesha's proposal. It offers a compromise. 
I also would note that the IRT's work is not just about trademark protection, 
or 'interests', but also about limiting consumer confusion, and addressing 
other kinds of issues that were identified during the public comment process 
involving the collision of trademarks and domain names.  
I like that the proposed language Ayesha offers is high level enough that it 
shows appreciation but does not lock in those members who wish to say more, or 
less, about the IRT recommendations. 
Ayesha's proposal  "The BC recognizes the work and efforts of all those who 
participated in
> > the IRT. The BC believes that this report is productive step forward in
> > addressing several issues with respect to new gTLDs.
> > 
> > The BC urges its members to post their individual comments on the
> > substance of the report at Public comment space
> > http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-4-29may09-en.htm";

On a personal note, to those from the BC who worked ON the IRT, I appreciate 
your accepting this 'assignment', your dedication and commitment of your 
time/and intellectual expertise, and most recently, this week,  that you are 
gracious and generous with your time in briefing all groups on the IRT's report 
during the ICANN meeting, often giving up being in meetings on other topics 
where you undoubtedly needed to be, from your business interests.  I realize 
that you are also now faced with even more time in the public sessions. This 
commitment is quite considerable, and still before you.   I hope you will 
accept my expression of gratitude, and if you care to, feel free to take at 
least this paragraph and share it with your IRT colleagues.